Tweet
I love this thread. It’s got the two biggest douche bags on NSB arguing over who’s dumber.
-
-
Not really a fact. More just one of many opinions.
For example, in commentary yesterday they were claiming that this was the first trilogy to have the lineal title on the line in all three fights. Because they believe Fury never lost lineal when he was banned and retired.
Now I disagree with them and agree with you. I think he did lose it by retiring and getting banned.
Where we differ is that I think the top two fighters met in April 2017, with Fury not active, and competed for the lineal title.
Therefore Usyk is now the lineal champion. Fury has held it once. Joshua is one of only six men to win it twice and is about to attempt to win it three times.
Another version of the facts. There are a few. Until those two possible lines meet each other, it won't be resolved definitively. History sorts out lineal status, not ESPN or TBRB.Last edited by Toffee; 10-10-2021, 03:44 PM.Comment
-
1. Fury
2. Usyk
3. Joshua
4. Wilder
5. EVERYONE Else.Comment
-
He's right though. Wlad being lineal is based on Ring making **** up and youse saying okay. There's nothing real behind it.
I recognize Tyson but you can't disrespect someone's opinion for being hard lined about history if the topic is historical. There is 0 precedence for what they did for Wlad. Lennox is the last lineal at HW to have won his title through a method that had proceeded him. It's a historical honor given to Wlad on no historical grounds that Fury won. Even if ****EM doesn't know that or is just being opportunistic.
I don't write lineages that distinguish present claimants as champions myself. I do informational ones but not lineages. If you want the honor that used to be then you have to earn it in the manner that used to be. Not make up some **** and print a bunch of copies so there's a mindless mass of dumb that just repeats your made up bull****.
Comment
-
You just summed up the whole reason lineal doesn't mean s*** - people can't even agree on what lineal is today.
Debating about which boxer is better than the others is good - that's part of boxing.
Debating about whether a title exists, how it exists, who has it and why they have it, is just flat out f***ing ******. It's a concept that no one can agree on, and it's in the graveyard.
You can consider anything you want in your own head - it doesn't make it real.Comment
-
I believe Wlad was. But there's lots of disagreement on exactly when he became lineal champion. Was it Chagaev, Povetkin, Pulev? Who made the concensus top 2? Especially while his brother was fighting. I believe he won it by beating everyone he could face.
If you believe Wlad was, then you believe Fury was, but there's lots of disagreement on whether Fury lost it or not. Fury claimed it after his absence as a marketing tool - that's very much up for debate.
If you believe Fury lost it by being banned, inactive and retired then there's disagreement on whether Joshua v Klitschko was the consensus top 2 fight to win it.
If you believe AJ didn't win it then there's debate over whether the second Wilder v Fury fight was a consensus top 2. In Fury's second career he hadn't beaten anyone of note to be ranked top 2. You could say similar for Wilder's whole career.
So it could be Usyk, it could be vacant, or it could be Fury.
That's why, similar to Marchegiano's comment, the lineage is a historical thing. It's not something you can just claim unless there's an absolute clarity.Comment
-
Again, I think that's very much up for debate.
TBRB's current champion (Fury) is predicated on the decision to remove Klitschko from their rankings prior to the Joshua fight. If you rightly remove Fury, then they had them 1 (WK) and 2 (AJ) a few months before the fight and then reversed the order after the fight to 1 (AJ) and 2 (WK).
That's an arbitrary decision. It's their own rules. In lineal history it wouldn't stack up.
Nothing is clear. And TBRB don't make the rules.Last edited by Toffee; 10-10-2021, 04:18 PM.Comment
Comment